You are currently viewing the old forums. We have upgraded to a new NFL Forum. This old forum is being left as a read-only archive.
Please update your bookmarks to our new forum at forums.footballsfuture.com.

I'm not saying the guy is elite; or ever will be but IMO he played good enough for a rookie to warrant another chance this year; with better coaching.

Drops aren't really that relevant because he had them both home and away. I'm merely showing what impact the teams he played on the road and at home had on his numbers at home and on the road.

As to your second point, I agree primarily because I don't see a long term answer available to us to replace him. If Weeden were 22 years old, I would not really have a problem with him. Unfortunately that is not the case. How many years do we give a guy whose 29?_________________

I'm going to assume he will be competing with a 3rd-4th round rookie QB and hopefully wins the job. I'm going to believe until proven otherwise that Weeden sucked because of Shrumur and will suceed in Norv's offense.

I'm not saying the guy is elite; or ever will be but IMO he played good enough for a rookie to warrant another chance this year; with better coaching.

Drops aren't really that relevant because he had them both home and away. I'm merely showing what impact the teams he played on the road and at home had on his numbers at home and on the road.

As to your second point, I agree primarily because I don't see a long term answer available to us to replace him. If Weeden were 22 years old, I would not really have a problem with him. Unfortunately that is not the case. How many years do we give a guy whose 29?

Personally, I give him atleast 1 more and then see what happens.

If there are no viable options this year then wait til next. I don't see any reason to give up important assets ($$ or draft picks) on qbs who probably won't be any better than he is.

I think too many teams panic because they don't have a qb. Thus resulting in a high pick spent on one and they don't fare any better than the previous guy and they are out the top pick.

I would like to see Brandon given another year, us try to finalize our OL, get a tight end and fix the defense THEN see about replacing him._________________

He played 3 below average defenses at home, he played 5 on the road. I'm sure that helped, especially given that outside of the crazy Bengals performances, the only time he had a rating of 80+ was against those bad defenses.

You conclusion is inaccurate. First of all, the comparative ranking of how much yardage a pass defense gave up is not a good absolute measure of how good or bad a defense is. There is simply not enough info in a ranking of pass yardage allowed.

Also, your cutoff of an 80 passer rating ignored his 3 games where he was between 77.5 to 79.4 (that's 20% of all of his games because of a 2.5 point difference). The cutoff should be 77.5 or higher. In that case, 9 of his 15 starts would be examined, including games against the #1 and #3 teams in pass yardage given up.

Now let's look at those 9 games (6 on the road, 3 at home).

What I'll do is report the QB rating those teams gave up against all other QBs (not including Weeden), then I'll report Weeden's rating in the game in parentheses.

First, you can see how the rating of a defense based on passing yards is inaccurate since you had KC as good and the Giants as bad.

Next, you can see that Weeden performed at least as well as the average in almost every game.

The caveat is that Weeden did this while he was a rookie and his top 3 receivers combined had one year of prior NFL experience.

Estonianzulu wrote:

Drops aren't really that relevant because he had them both home and away. I'm merely showing what impact the teams he played on the road and at home had on his numbers at home and on the road.

As to your second point, I agree primarily because I don't see a long term answer available to us to replace him. If Weeden were 22 years old, I would not really have a problem with him. Unfortunately that is not the case. How many years do we give a guy whose 29?

Drops are always relevant when considering a QBs performance. Drops are passes that were considered to be thrown well enough to be caught, so QBs that have several of them counting against their performance should be pointed out. Weeden had over 30 drops on the season, what I don't know is exactly how many were on the road vs. at home.

The answer to the bolded is "the same amount of time you give a guy that is 22". If any QB is not good after a few years, he likely never will be.

The only difference age makes is how long he can sustain being a good starter or how many years he plays as a backup if he can't cut it as a starter. If he can't do either, he will be out of the NFL no matter his age._________________

I think given Weeden is 29, you still give him a minimum of 1 more year. A qb doesn't go down the tubes when he hits 30 like say a RB does... We came into this thinking Weeden could have 7 years maybe more in this league.

Don't drop the guy after year 1 when his numbers were far from atrocious._________________

Next, you can see that Weeden performed at least as well as the average in almost every game.

Of his good games? Yes. Of his bad games, no. If he was an average QB, he would have the statistical success of an average QB, he did not. There is no way shape or form that you can describe Brandon Weeden's rookie season as good. He was bad.

Quote:

The caveat is that Weeden did this while he was a rookie and his top 3 receivers combined had one year of prior NFL experience.

Not denying that, never did.

Estonianzulu wrote:

what I don't know is exactly how many were on the road vs. at home.

Which was why I said they were irrelevant. They are not without use in discussing the overall good vs bad, but in this particular discussion I did not see them having a direct impact. my assumption, which could have been faulty, but was being made by everyone in this discussion, was that drops impacted his home success as much as his away success.

Quote:

The answer to the bolded is "the same amount of time you give a guy that is 22". If any QB is not good after a few years, he likely never will be.

Not sure I agree. If, coming into this year, Joe Flacco was 33 years old, it would have a lot to say about his potential future with the franchise._________________

Next, you can see that Weeden performed at least as well as the average in almost every game.

Of his good games? Yes. Of his bad games, no. If he was an average QB, he would have the statistical success of an average QB, he did not. There is no way shape or form that you can describe Brandon Weeden's rookie season as good. He was bad.

You are comparing him to an average from a different group. There are no other rookie QBs that had their top 3 receivers have only one year combined NFL experience. Why are you doing that?

Compare him to QBs that were in similar situations, if you can.

I compared his best 9 performances to other QBs that faced the same teams and he was compareable in all games. That is an indication that he's good.

Your indictment that he is bad is based on ignoring the circumstances.

Quote:

Which was why I said they were irrelevant. They are not without use in discussing the overall good vs bad, but in this particular discussion I did not see them having a direct impact. my assumption, which could have been faulty, but was being made by everyone in this discussion, was that drops impacted his home success as much as his away success.

I really just don't know either. But still, the drops were well above average and did significantly influence his overall performance. I need to think of a way to account for that.

Quote:

Quote:

The answer to the bolded is "the same amount of time you give a guy that is 22". If any QB is not good after a few years, he likely never will be.

Not sure I agree. If, coming into this year, Joe Flacco was 33 years old, it would have a lot to say about his potential future with the franchise.

The question was "how long do you give him", not "how much potential future does he have". I think I answered both questions in my initial response._________________

I don't claim to know if Weeden will be an elite QB in the future or how long his career will last. But I think he has shown that he is a good starting NFL QB.

People often give too much credit to the QB for wins, losses, TDs, INTs, good throws, bad throws, good decisions, and bad decisions. It's like some think a QB plays in a vacuum or something.

I'm not saying that these things don't happen, just that it is more often the result of circumstances that are clearly a reflection of other factors (e.g. players, game situations, coaches, and luck).

The fact that Weeden has performed well several times despite players, coaches, game situations, and luck that didn't help him suggests to me that he is far from bad, and even pretty good.

If we simply focus on his performance without any accounting of the circumstances, we can't be accurate.

Can someone show me a rookie QB that was in a similar circumstance and did as well? ever?

Luck had an all-pro WR to catch 106 of his passes (not even a career year). Wilson had a top defense and an experienced RB. RG3 had an experienced coach with a great offensive history and several experienced WRs.

For the record I am on the fence about Weeden, and I hope he can turn into a servicable QB that will make us competitive for a few years while we groom a future star.

I just feel that a lot of people expect way to much and want to push players out the door and onto the bench for the next big thing.
The Browns keep changing trying to find the magic QB superstar that can come in and light the world on fire while never giving people the time needed to develop their skills under the right coaching.

VERY few qb's come into the league and are top 10 to 15 QB material, most are developed or learned the ropes behind a good QB in a good system.

For example, would anyone here give this rookie QB a shot at a second year in todays instant gratification environment?
12 games started (started 1st game part of the way into the season)
50% completion percentage
69.7 QB rating
8 TD's to 7 Int's
131.5 Yards per game
6.4 YPA

The above QB was Bernie Kosar.
When you review his stats they were near the bottom of the league and did not indicate his marked improvement in year 2.
58.4% comp, 17tds to 10 ints, 241YPG, 7.3 YPA and 83.8 Rating

I am not saying Weeden is the next Bernie, all im saying is we should give him a year or two, develop a stable system and offense philosophy and start looking for a young replacement that fits the system to train into and not be thrown into the fire as a rookie.
We will need him due to Weeden's age and possiblity of not have a high enough football IQ to take the team to a better record than 8-8_________________

People often give too much credit to the QB for wins, losses, TDs, INTs, good throws, bad throws, good decisions, and bad decisions. It's like some think a QB plays in a vacuum or something.

I don't judge QB's in a vacuum, but you have to use some reliable statistics to judge a QB's success. If not TD's, Int's, Good Throws, Good Decisions... what can it be?

When I watched Weeden I saw a QB who made bad throws, had poor accuracy at times and could not consistently score when he needed to. He had times when he played very well as well, but those poor times well outweighed the good ones.

Good QB play makes all the talent around them better, its the reason Peyton Manning can go from a Indianapolis Colts team a 10-6 team, to a 2-14 team, to a 11-5 team with most of those same receiving talents. Bad QB play makes the team look worse. Outside of perhaps a HC, no one has as great an impact on the performance of a team as a QB.

I've never been a fan of Weeden, I'll admit. While I will root with everything I have for him to improve, I don't expect it to happen._________________

People often give too much credit to the QB for wins, losses, TDs, INTs, good throws, bad throws, good decisions, and bad decisions. It's like some think a QB plays in a vacuum or something.

I don't judge QB's in a vacuum, but you have to use some reliable statistics to judge a QB's success. If not TD's, Int's, Good Throws, Good Decisions... what can it be?

When I watched Weeden I saw a QB who made bad throws, had poor accuracy at times and could not consistently score when he needed to. He had times when he played very well as well, but those poor times well outweighed the good ones.

Good QB play makes all the talent around them better, its the reason Peyton Manning can go from a Indianapolis Colts team a 10-6 team, to a 2-14 team, to a 11-5 team with most of those same receiving talents. Bad QB play makes the team look worse. Outside of perhaps a HC, no one has as great an impact on the performance of a team as a QB.

I've never been a fan of Weeden, I'll admit. While I will root with everything I have for him to improve, I don't expect it to happen.

Agree.

I am not sure the bigger deficiencies in his game are coachable...I think they are innate.

With all the time the OL gave him to make plays, he should have shown and produced a lot more.

Just imagine how he would have looked in McCoy's place during the previous season: Running for his life at the snap, no running game and lesser WRs. Pretty ugly images._________________Everything happens exactly the way it is supposed to happen...otherwise, it would happen some other way

People often give too much credit to the QB for wins, losses, TDs, INTs, good throws, bad throws, good decisions, and bad decisions. It's like some think a QB plays in a vacuum or something.

I don't judge QB's in a vacuum, but you have to use some reliable statistics to judge a QB's success. If not TD's, Int's, Good Throws, Good Decisions... what can it be?

Like I said, you use the circumstances. Did you see anything about Weeden's circumstaces that should be considered when looking at his stats?

Quote:

When I watched Weeden I saw a QB who made bad throws, had poor accuracy at times and could not consistently score when he needed to. He had times when he played very well as well, but those poor times well outweighed the good ones.

Describe how the poor times outweighed the good ones please. Was it like when Gordon dropped the game winner? Was it any of the 30+ other drops? Or when the PI penalty took away his game winner?

Was it when he refused to throw a wild ball into a crowd for a likely INT or incomplete pass on 4th down because no one was open? Was it one of the 5 or 6 times he missed an open receiver and then it was exaggerated into 20 times? Was it when an inexperienced receiver ran too shallow of a route and just missed a 1st down?

Was it one of the 3 or more times he was hit as he threw and the resulting pass was intercepted and the announcers called it an underthrow since they weren't really watching the game? Was it when a formation penalty took away another TD?

Really, tell me, I'd like to know where you are coming from.

Quote:

Good QB play makes all the talent around them better, its the reason Peyton Manning can go from a Indianapolis Colts team a 10-6 team, to a 2-14 team, to a 11-5 team with most of those same receiving talents. Bad QB play makes the team look worse. Outside of perhaps a HC, no one has as great an impact on the performance of a team as a QB.

Good QB play comes from good talent around the QB too. Luck's team made him look better than he actually was, unless you think that barely beating Weeden's rating is all a team needs to win 11 games.

I agree that QB play can have a greater impact on a team's performance than any other individual player. That doesn't mean that a QB does most of it by himself, just that he does more than any other individual player. There are still 10 other players on offense that all have an impact.

Of those 10 other players on the Browns, Gordon, Richardson, Schwartz, and Benji were all rookies and Little was a second year player.

I'm not sure why you keep avoiding a discussion about the circumstances. You just keep coming back to your conclusion that Weeden is bad without addressing what it is exactly that you are basing your opinion on. I really am curious to know. Is it just his stats? Then you must not like Luck either. Is it the losing? If so, why did you expect any better given the circumstances?

Why do you seem to dismiss the circumstances so easily?

Quote:

I've never been a fan of Weeden, I'll admit. While I will root with everything I have for him to improve, I don't expect it to happen.

I'm not sure I buy it EZ. It doesn't seem like you're rooting for Weeden at all._________________

People often give too much credit to the QB for wins, losses, TDs, INTs, good throws, bad throws, good decisions, and bad decisions. It's like some think a QB plays in a vacuum or something.

I don't judge QB's in a vacuum, but you have to use some reliable statistics to judge a QB's success. If not TD's, Int's, Good Throws, Good Decisions... what can it be?

When I watched Weeden I saw a QB who made bad throws, had poor accuracy at times and could not consistently score when he needed to. He had times when he played very well as well, but those poor times well outweighed the good ones.

Good QB play makes all the talent around them better, its the reason Peyton Manning can go from a Indianapolis Colts team a 10-6 team, to a 2-14 team, to a 11-5 team with most of those same receiving talents. Bad QB play makes the team look worse. Outside of perhaps a HC, no one has as great an impact on the performance of a team as a QB.

I've never been a fan of Weeden, I'll admit. While I will root with everything I have for him to improve, I don't expect it to happen.

Agree.

I am not sure the bigger deficiencies in his game are coachable...I think they are innate.

With all the time the OL gave him to make plays, he should have shown and produced a lot more.

Just imagine how he would have looked in McCoy's place during the previous season: Running for his life at the snap, no running game and lesser WRs. Pretty ugly images.

Just imagine how Colt would have looked in this offense, running for his life..getting sacked 4 times in 17 attempts, throwing the ball in the dirt 5 times for no reason. Pretty ugly QBing.

But do tell bruce, with all the time the OL gave him, why were so many passes batted and dropped? That's about 57 of his incomplete passes.

I think it because the OLine can't win, but loses games. How many games did the OLine win for us anyway? How many TDs did they block for? not enough to win..._________________

People often give too much credit to the QB for wins, losses, TDs, INTs, good throws, bad throws, good decisions, and bad decisions. It's like some think a QB plays in a vacuum or something.

I don't judge QB's in a vacuum, but you have to use some reliable statistics to judge a QB's success. If not TD's, Int's, Good Throws, Good Decisions... what can it be?

When I watched Weeden I saw a QB who made bad throws, had poor accuracy at times and could not consistently score when he needed to. He had times when he played very well as well, but those poor times well outweighed the good ones.

Good QB play makes all the talent around them better, its the reason Peyton Manning can go from a Indianapolis Colts team a 10-6 team, to a 2-14 team, to a 11-5 team with most of those same receiving talents. Bad QB play makes the team look worse. Outside of perhaps a HC, no one has as great an impact on the performance of a team as a QB.

I've never been a fan of Weeden, I'll admit. While I will root with everything I have for him to improve, I don't expect it to happen.

Agree.

I am not sure the bigger deficiencies in his game are coachable...I think they are innate.

With all the time the OL gave him to make plays, he should have shown and produced a lot more.

Just imagine how he would have looked in McCoy's place during the previous season: Running for his life at the snap, no running game and lesser WRs. Pretty ugly images.

Just imagine how Colt would have looked in this offense, running for his life..getting sacked 4 times in 17 attempts, throwing the ball in the dirt 5 times for no reason. Pretty ugly QBing.

But do tell bruce, with all the time the OL gave him, why were so many passes batted and dropped? That's about 57 of his incomplete passes.

I think it because the OLine can't win, but loses games. How many games did the OLine win for us anyway? How many TDs did they block for? not enough to win...

Denial is more than a river in Africa, Entropy.

You can make every excuse you want to for Weeden while others of us point out his obvious flaws/failures or, perhaps more importantly, different points of view from yours.

Let's just let time tell.

Let's start by watching a legitimate QB competition play out in camp and preseason this year._________________Everything happens exactly the way it is supposed to happen...otherwise, it would happen some other way